About your Search

20121121
20121129
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)
majority leader eric cantor and congressman peter king are rebuking the norquist anti-tax pledge, a new gang of six saying in recent days they would break that pledge to look for new ways to generate revenue republican congressman peter king said bluntly, he is not ruling anything out. >> i agree entirely. a pledge to sign 20 years ago, 18 years ago. i think everything should be on the table. lou: two of the senator's not only reversing themselves on raising taxes but also rethinking their opposition to a susan rice secretary of state apartment. senators gramm and mccain both revising their political positions in a bit -- at a breathtaking pace. joining a summer we are calling the republican reset, the fiscal cliff, of course, and the coup in egypt, the president seemingly in search of a campaign. after a long holiday weekend, does anyone remember been gauzy? to find out, we are joined by of and the daily column founder and editor cockies contributor. thank you. let's start with republican party. is that too strong a word? in disarray. >> i think disarray is a little strong right now. w
, you do not know what is going to happen down the road, people like peter king who made a pledge 25 years ago. times have changed. have you two wars that are not funded. have you a medicare prescription drug plan that a lot of these republicans voted for, not funded. you have a deficit thattic vides a trillion -- that exceeds a trillion dollars. i don't think any republicans will say what the hell let's just raise taxes because barack obama says so. neil: they are running with tails between leg. >> look at the electeds. >> look, bottom line, i don't like pledges of any kind, you have to be pragmatic in washington both sides, democrats should not make pledges either, they need to come to the table. neil: you don't have to worry, they will not. what is going on on the whole tax thing, and whole norquist thing? main were saying that -- today saying, that this is really about the imploying of grover norquist, he took afence to that in my interview earlier, but that is what is going on, probably more more than that, what do you say? >> first, i ca i have to addrest julie said, almost som
to her side of the story. not what she is about. chance to speak up. peter king nailed it. the intel community might have given you papers and a talking point. no excuse not to use your inquisitiveness and find out answers on your own. the world is in new york city. what do you read on this? for the last five days i get this is al-qaeda. i'm not going to go throughout and make myself look bad -- >> eric: why are the senators pulling back? >> dana: i have a reason. i don't know this for sure. gut instinct. if you read carl cannon of real clear politics, straight down the middle guy, touching on your thing how bizarre the story is and how they slid past it. i doesn't pass the smell test. i think the reason that the republican senators can back off if that is what they're doing is last week, national liberal columnist came out and said it's not just the benghazi thing. forget about that. she does not deserve a promotion based on performance. if you have that, then if you have that on the left, on the right you can let go a little bit. >> kimberly: quick, i want to bring this up. this is
to peter king or these others. >> and this guy is a political loan shark. the majority of americans want to see tax rates go up on the rich, but will norquist convince enough republicans it's better to dig in their heels than to reach a compromise? tom coburn is the republican senator from oklahoma, and joe klein is a columnist for "time." senator, i don't want to abuse your presence. my children think you're the greatest. i have a couple kids, one who worked on the debt commission and another one who just loves you for some reason. let's find out why. it seems to me if you look at the numbers, just arithmetic here, right now the government is taking in 15.7% of the gdp in the current fiscal year and spending 22.9% of the gdp. common sense tells us if we're going to get to 20, it seems like getting maybe to 20, maybe some liberals want to bid more, conservatives want to bid less. you have to come in both directions. your thoughts? >> i agree. the problem, chris, is we haven't had long-term thinkers in congress for a long time, and if you really look at it, the last 30 years we've lived o
and bob corker in the senate and peter king in the house, they haven't said overall now we changed our tune, we're in favor of raising taxes, what they said is okay, maybe we will budge on tax increases of some form in exchange for some cuts to entitlements and things like that. so that's clearly a major difference in their stance. there is going to be a lot of tough negotiating that goes on here. no question about it. but the thing that has changed is the republicans are beginning to signal they will accept tax increases as part of some kind of deal to solve this fiscal cliff problem and start dealing with the $16 trillion debt. >> so you brought up some of the names. where do you seat republican party right now? are they beginning to line up behind the bob corkers and the saxby chambliss and lindsey graham willing to talk about new taxes on the wealthy, or is the party still, like, say, rand paul, i talked to him a short time ago. take a listen. >> -- willing to raise taxes when we're still spending $300,000 a year on robotic squirrels to watch rattlesnakes attack a robotic squirrel
have been cracking this door a little bit. peter king said over the weekend for instance if i was in congress in 1941 with refrpbl reference to the pledge you made i would have signed a war against japan. i'm not going to attack japan today. the world has changed and the economic situation is different. that from peter kin. about is make it clear, what raising revenues and not tax rates. just on the surface, why do you believe that the door is starting to crack a little bit? why are republicans talking this way? >> two things, the people who are saying that they might vote for a tax increase that bush got talked into in 1990 for return for make believe spending cuts are the same people who said this two years ago, this is a complete media-created frenzy. peter king said this two years ago, lindsey graham said this two years ago. chamblis of georgia said this two years ago. they said all these things all during the negotiations where they tried to undermine where john boehner and mitch mcconnell got 2.5 trillion in spending cuts without a dollar than tax increase and those peop
that and peter king did too. it is against raising taxes. there are other ways to do revenue. the democrats don't like those other ways. it is called growth. that brings in more revenue. and readjusting the tax code to bring in more revenue. you don't have to raise taxes on anybody. host: let's go to jim in new castle, delaware, on our republican line. caller: good morning. the reason we have to be against tax increases and for spending cuts is to just show that we are a different party than the national sociologist parted as running the white house and the senate right now. economic growth is being held back by the gigantic government in this country. have to go over= a cliff. right now we have to change the business cycle. washington is getting bigger and we are getting closer to the final disaster. republicans have to stand for something. it cannot just be democrat light. i am a republican and am pretty disgusted by what going on in the republican party. we need to get some conservatives running. we cannot just keep nominating the next guy. we need someone like ronald reagan again. we need t
, saxby chambliss lindsey graham, peter king, bob corker is the other one who said we're not bound by this. we don't feel we're bound by this pledge anymore. chuck schumer yesterday dan indicating that this -- he sees this as a good sign. >> republicans in both the house and senate are deciding they no longer want to be married to this pledge. republicans are saying they want a divorce from grover norquist. that alone is a leading indicator that the fiscal deal is within reach. both sides are still far apart. the discussions over the next few weeks will be difficult but with each new republican disavowing grover norquist, the chances of a deal rises sharply. >> bill: daniella, is grover over? >> oh, please, lord, let it be true! you know, i think so. there was a funny thing politico arena they ask these questions every day. one of the questions a couple of days ago was is grover norquist's reign over. the first person who responded was grover norquist. no. republicans are -- blah, blah, blah. >> bill: he says his
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)